Subject: Re: CAP / Busytime Restart

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 10:27:11 -0500

John, I archived "most" of the IETF emails.  I just set the file to go 
create and index and I'll search it to see what I can find.  However, I 
think what happened is when the new editors took over working on the draft 
- they may have removed all the "Editors Comments" and not realized that 
nothing was in the text to resolve the issues.  I know they were focused 
on getting transport stuff out and using BEEP.  that's around the 06 
timeframe
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
04/04/2003 08:22

        To:     [email-masked]
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: CAP / Busytime Restart

[email-masked] wrote:

> Somehow all this text was removed from CAP in CAP-06 without any WG 
> discussion and I now find: 

[...]

> I think we should reinstate the Editors text as Draft Text and clearly 
> and unambiguiously specify _THE_ way that busytime lookups are to be 
> done in CAP and then we can go to Last Call! 

I agree--unless someone can find evidence that WG discussion occurred 
after all.  (No slam on Bruce here; the mailing list archive isn't that 
easy to search.  Someone who remembers the discussion, if there was one, 
or whoever removed the text, might know better what to search for.)

-- 
/============================================================\
|John Stracke      [email-masked]                     |
|Principal Engineer|http://www.centive.com                   |
|Centive           |My opinions are my own.                  |
|============================================================|
|"God does not play games with His loyal servants." "Whoo-ee,|
|where have you *been*?" --_Good Omens_                      |
\============================================================/

---

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 10:32:17 -0500

[email-masked] wrote:

>However, I 
>nothing was in the text to resolve the issues.
>
Ah, yes, that would be an understandable mistake.  Um...does that mean 
we should look back at -05 for editor's comments that -10 doesn't cover? 
(Doug, that's your cue to groan.  ;-)

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 16:06:25 -0700

*ALL* draft versions of CAP are now on:

	http://www.calsch.org/ietf/drafts.html

I welcome comments and feedback - John :-)

John Stracke wrote:
>> However, I think what happened is when the new editors took over 
>> working on the draft - they may have removed all the "Editors 
>> Comments" and not realized that nothing was in the text to resolve the 
>> issues.
>>

-- 

  Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
  -------------------------------|-----------------------------
  [email-masked]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
  http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                 |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                 We Do Standards - You Need Standards